Skip to main content

About your Search

English 26
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)
from both sides of the aisle. attack in benghazi that left four americans dead, including chris stevens, ambassador to libya. molly henneberg is live in washington. >> molly: the white house and state department are defending ambassador susan rice. a spokesman for barack obama says she has done extraordinary work for the american people. also democratic senator john kerry called rice, quote a remarkable public servant and state department put out a statement defending rice's comments to those sunday shows. the statement said, quote, at every turn, ambassador rice said she was providing the best information and best assessment that the administration had at the time. based on what was provided to ambassador rice and other senator senior intelligence committee but they knew one day of the assault that it was a coordinated terror attack likely tied to al-qaeda. congressman king wants to know why ambassador rice went on tv five days after the attack and said otherwise. >> the entire administration, miss informed the world and she was our representative to the world explaining what happened.
administration, as lawmakers have now sent a letter to james clapper demanding answers on benghazi attack. of considers, yesterday we were talking about james clapper. friday, his office coming out and basically staking responsibility for the intelligence failures. well, now, senator joe lieberman and others coming forward with this letter. >> alisyn: and also, who is going to take responsible for the tactffactactfufact-- spblt for three weeks later. 20 days past the september 11th attacks and fbi isn't in benghazi, they're in tripoli, for security reasons they say, they say that the libyan security forces aren't providing them with security and some sort of visa problem. this is unheard of. so, senator bob corker and joe lieberman among others, they want answers from clapper about why it's happening. >> dave: to the point at that tony schaeffer made on our program yesterday, he's worked with the fbi, some of the toughest and highly technically trained individuals on the planet. comfortable going into hostile zones like benghazi, it must not be an internal reason, it must be someone else
on the consulate in benghazi, peter king becoming the highest ranking lawmaker to call for her to step down. and congressman king making his case moments ago here on fox news channel. >> if ambassador rice was deliberately misleading the american people and showed a lack of knowledge and sophistication, she shouldn't hold that. the entire administration is wrong and this is the american people, and the world, and she was as spokeswoman, our representative to the world and explaining what happened and virtually everything she said was wrong. >> kelly: with that, we welcome you to a brand new hour of america's election headquarters, i'm kelly wright. >> i'm jamie colby, an interesting new twist to the whole story, congressman king joins a growing list of lawmakers, why ambassador rice initially declared the benghazi attack, a reaction to a protests in cairo over an anti-islam film before acknowledging it was a coordinated attack. and christopher stevens and three other americans were killed in the september 11th attack in benghazi and molly henneberg is following the story live in washington
consulate in benghazi was a deliberate and organized terrorist assault carried out by extremists affiliated or sympathetic with al qaeda, a flat statement just issued. let's discuss the political fallout in our strategy session. joining us now, the democratic strategist and cnn political contributor donna brazile, along with david frum, contributing editor at "the daily beast" and "newsweek." david, a powerful statement just released by the director of national intelligence. it totally contradicts what the administration was saying in the days that immediately followed the killing of ambassador stevens and the three other americans. what do you make of this? >> totally supports what my colleague reported three days ago who was the first with this story. what it makes is the american ambassador dead, the administration's first impulse was to find ways to cover itself and avoid acknowledging the mistake the ambassador had completely inadequate security in a dangerous place. and it did that by pitting on this youtube video of the maker on his way to prison and charged under other offenses. in
. sources are telling fox news they are convinced the attack in benghazi was directly tied to al qaeda and they believe a former detainee at the u.s. detention center in guantanamo bay may have led the assault. chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge joins us live from washington of the catherine, we learning about the former detainee? what do we know now? >> reporter: good morning ub ba. according to the file sufyan qumu had direct ties going back to 1993 when he traveled to afghanistan and trained at bin laden's camp. in addition to the 20 year relationship with the al qaeda leader, qumu is tied to a. the assessment states, quote the libyan government considers the detainee a dangerous man who has no qualms about committing terrorist acts. fox news is also told that there are small scale camps run by extremists in libya, while not established training camps like we once saw in afghanistan prior to 9/11 the zones of activity we're told are around benghazi where the attack on the consulate be took place, darnah. and southwest libya. the u.s. intelligence community are watch
of two weeks now. that is what happened in benghazi? why was the message coming out of the administration so muddled at best and misleading at worse? when did they know that it was a terrorist attack? why won't the president actually use the term terrorist attack? well, yesterday there was a major break through and one agency came out and took responsibility. >> in fact, it was james clapper's office, the director of national intelligent basically trying to take the onus off the white house by saying hey it was the intelligence community's fault and said, this quote: in the immediate aftermath there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day in cairo. we provided that initial assessment to the executive branch officials and members of congress who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available. through the our investigation we continued to emphasize that our information was preliminary and evolving. >> we were waiting for someone like james clapper or tom donilin to weigh
a growing list of lawmakers, why ambassador rice initially declared the benghazi attack, a reaction to a protests in cairo over an anti-islam film before acknowledging it was a coordinated attack. and christopher stevens and three other americans were killed in the september 11th attack in benghazi and molly henneberg is following the story live in washington what happens next. >> she has her supporters including the president saying she's done extraordinary work at the united nations and providing the best knowledge that the administration had at the time. and john kerry, democratic chairman of the foreign relations committee says she's a quote enormously capable person, but republican congressman peter king is it not convinced. he wants to know why five days after the attack that killed ambassador chris stevens and three others, ambassador rice stated publicly on several talk shows it was a spontaneous attack that grew out of an anti-muslim video when there was evidence it was a coordinated terror attack. >> ambassador rice should resign and we should investigate how high up this
current assessment is that what happened in benghazi was, in fact, initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo, almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video. what we think then transpired in benghazi is that opportunistic extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. they came with heavy weapons, which unfortunately, are readily available in postrevolutionary libya. and it escalated into a much more violent episode. obviously, that's our best judgment now. we'll await the results of the investigation, and the president has been very clear we'll work with the libyan authorities to bring those responsible to justice. >> was there a failure here that this administration is responsible for, whether it's an intelligence failure, a failure to see this coming, or a failure adequately protect u.s. embassies and installations from a spontaneous reaction like this? >> david, i don't think so. first of all, we had no actionable intelligence to suggest that any attack o
director of national intelligence to explain why the fbi has want been able to make it in to benghazi safely. >> reporter: the fbi is worried about security in benghazi, conducting their investigation and interviews in tripoli, 400 mile away from the scene of the attack. senator bob corker of the senate foreign relations committee wants to know why. he fired off a letter to james clapper, demanding answer, saying, in part, just ab days ago, the administration apparently judged it was appropriate for our consulate to be lightly guarded and it was safe for our embassador -- ambationz dorto come through the city with a small security de tail. what has changed in libya in such a short time that even fbi agents, our most elite personnel cannot safely enter the city? the consulate didn't have the standard marine guard. there are calls for the resignation of u.n. bambass dorsusan rice who, said that it appeared to be a spontaneous uprising against an anti-muslim video. >> five days went by. we have reports that intelligence people knew within 24 hours that this was a terror attack, yet, the
the benghazi attacks. some statements were made by the am bass do to the united nations, susan rice. now, peter king is calling for her to step down. here's what he told our wolf blitzer. >> i believe this was such a failure of foreign policy message and leadership, such a misstatement of facts, as were known at the time and for her to go on all of those shows and in effect be our spokesman for the world and misinform our allies and spokesmen around the world. someone has to pay the price for this. things go wrong and everyone forgets about it the next day. we have to send a clear message on such a vital issue like this where the american ambassador was killed, the presumptioned a to be it's terrorism. can see why they would have said it's too early to definitively rule out it was terrorism. to me, it was a terrible mistake to make whether intentionally or unintentionally, to show the significance, she should resign. >> the white house is standing by rice. they said everything she said in that interview was cleared by int interagency groups based on information they had and certainly nothing wa
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)